M/S. GLOSS STUDIO PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORP. WARD-2(2), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2516/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 July 2026AY 2022-234 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) by accepting the assessee's reasons as sufficient cause. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed deduction under Section 80JJAA, but the CPC disallowed it due to belated filing of Form 10DA. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed in limine due to a significant delay in filing.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing Form 10DA and the subsequent delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned to allow adjudication on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80JJAA,Section 139(1),Section 143(1),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA

Hearing: 18.06.2026Pronounced: 02.07.2026

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘सी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI श्री जॉजज जॉजज के, उपाध्यक्ष एवं श्री एस.आर.रघुनाथा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 2516/Chny/2026 ननिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2022-23 M/s. Gloss Studio Private The Income Tax Officer Limited, vs. Corporate Ward 2(2) 115, Raja Street, Chennai. Dr. Seethapathy Nagar, Chennai – 600 042 [PAN: AAHCG-0705-E] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant by : Shri. B. Ramakrishnan, FCA प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri. Manjunath H.S, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 18.06.2026 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 02.07.2026 आदेश /O R D E R PER S. R. RAGHUNATHA, AM :

The present appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 23.02.2026 passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl/JCIT(A)-3, Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld.CIT(A)”], arising from the intimation order dated 27.03.2023 passed by the CPC, Bengaluru (CPC) [hereinafter referred to as “the AO”], u/s.143(1) of the

:-2-: ITA. No:2516/Chny/2026 Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the Assessment Year 2022-23.

2.

The sole ground raised by the assessee is that the CPC, Bengaluru, has denied the deduction u/s.80JJAA of the Act for the reason that the assessee has belatedly filed Form 10DA, i.e. after the due date prescribed u/s.139(1) of the Act for the A.Y. 2022-23. 3. Brief facts of the case emanating from the records are that the assessee is a Private Limited Company, engaged in the business of post-production activities and filed its return of income on 30.11.2022 admitting an income of Rs.41,77,180/- after deduction of Rs.13,11,482/- claimed u/s.80JJAA of the Act. Thereafter, an intimation order dated 27.03.2023 was passed by the “CPC” wherein the sum claimed as deduction u/s.80JJAA was disallowed on the ground that the related Form 10DA was filed after the due date as specified u/s.139(1) of the Act and a demand of Rs.9,29,680/- was raised against the assessee. Subsequently, on 14.11.2024, the assessee filed a repeated rectification request u/s.154 of the Act seeking reprocessing of the return. However, even in the last rectification order dated 20.12.2024, the CPC disallowed the deduction of Rs.13,11,482/- claimed u/s.80JJAA of the Act and a demand of Rs.3,88,480/- was raised against the application dated 14.11.2024. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the CPC, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld.CIT(A) on 23.12.2025 with a delay in filing an appeal.

5.

At the outset, we observed that the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee in limine due to the assessee filing an appeal with delay of 972 days. Aggrieved by the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us.

:-3-: ITA. No:2516/Chny/2026 6. The ld.AR submitted that the ld.CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine by denying to condone the delay of 972 days in filing an appeal before the ld.CIT(A), without appreciating that the assessee had demonstrated reasonable cause for delay was mainly on account of seeking an alternative solution of rectification u/s.154 of the Act and further stated that technical considerations should not prevail over substantial justice. In respect of merits of the case, the ld.AR argued that the assessee was required to file Form 10DA on or before 30.10.2022, however, Form 10DA was uploaded by the Chartered Accountant on 15.11.2022 after filing the return of income i.e. 30.11.2022. The delay in uploading and verification of Form 10DA beyond the prescribed timeline, was purely procedural in nature, however the same was available (filed on 15.12.2022) before processing the return and issue the intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act by the CPC. In view of the above, the ld.AR prayed that the Tribunal may be pleased to set aside the order of ld.CIT(A) and remit the issues to the file of the ld.CIT(A). Further, ld.AR assured the bench that the ld.AR will represent on behalf of the assessee before the ld.CIT(A) to complete the appellate proceedings effectively.

7.

Per contra, the ld.DR submitted that the appeal was to be filed before the ld.CIT(A) by the assessee within 30 days of the service, but the assessee has filed an appeal with delay of 972 days. The assessee has been negligent in filing an appeal within the time limit provided and hence prayed for confirming the order of the ld.CIT(A).

8.

We have heard the rival parties and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the lower authorities. We note that the CPC has passed an order by considering the information available with the department assessee and on appeal the same has been dismissed in limine by the ld.CIT(A), NFAC without condoning the delay in filing of the appeal before the first appellate authority.

:-4-: ITA. No:2516/Chny/2026 9. In view of the foregoing facts and circumstances, and in order to advance the cause of substantial justice, we are inclined to grant one more opportunity to the assessee. Accordingly, the delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) is hereby condoned, as the assessee has duly set out the reasons for such delay in Form No. 35, which, in our considered opinion, constitutes sufficient cause. Consequently, the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) is set aside, and the matter is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the appeal afresh on merits, in accordance with law, after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to extend full cooperation and to furnish necessary written submissions and relevant evidence, as may be called for, in a timely manner.

10.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the court on 02nd July, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (जॉजा जॉजा के) (एस. आर. रघुनार्था) (GEORGE GEORGE K) (S. R. RAGHUNATHA) उपाध्यक्ष /VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चेन्नई/Chennai, ददनांक/Dated, the 02nd July, 2026. Devadas आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy to: 1. अपीलार्थी/Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent 3.आयकर आयुक्त/CIT– Chennai/Coimbatore/Madurai/Salem 4. पवभागीय प्रनतननधि/DR 5. गार्ा फाईल/GF Digitally signed by DEVADAS DEVADAS GOPALANACHARY GOPALANACHARY Date: 2026.07.07 18:02:59 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 80JJAA

All 275 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80JJAA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →